header-logo header-logo

Costs

04 August 2011
Issue: 7477 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Grand v Gill [2011] EWCA Civ 902, [2011] All ER (D) 249 (Jul)

In deciding what, if any costs order to make against a litigant in person, the court had to have regard to the considerations in CPR 44.3, which showed that the court had a discretion both as to whether to make an order for the payment of costs and if so, as to the amount of any costs. In deciding whether to make any costs order, the court had to have regard to all the circumstances, including: (i) whether the applicant for costs had succeeded on part of her appeal, even if she had not been wholly successful; (ii) whether it was reasonable for her to raise, pursue or contest a particular allegation or issue; and (iii) whether, having succeeded in her appeal, in whole or in part, she had exaggerated it. There was a cap on what the claimant could recover, namely two-thirds of the amount that would have been allowed had she been represented by a lawyer. Part 44.4 CPR required the court only

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Pillsbury—Steven James

Pillsbury—Steven James

Firm boosts London IP capability with high-profile technology sector hire

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Private client specialist joins as partner in Taunton office

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

Finance and restructuring offering strengthened by partner hire in London

NEWS
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) continues to stir controversy across civil litigation, according to NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School—AKA ‘The insider’
SRA v Goodwin is a rare disciplinary decision where a solicitor found to have acted dishonestly avoided being struck off, says Clare Hughes-Williams of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ. The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) imposed a 12-month suspension instead, citing medical evidence and the absence of harm to clients
In their latest Family Law Brief for NLJ, Ellie Hampson-Jones and Carla Ditz of Stewarts review three key family law rulings, including the latest instalment in the long-running saga of Potanin v Potanina
The Asian International Arbitration Centre’s sweeping reforms through its AIAC Suite of Rules 2026, unveiled at Asia ADR Week, are under examination in this week's NLJ by John (Ching Jack) Choi of Gresham Legal
In this week's issue of NLJ, Yasseen Gailani and Alexander Martin of Quinn Emanuel report on the High Court’s decision in Skatteforvaltningen (SKAT) v Solo Capital Partners LLP & Ors [2025], where Denmark’s tax authority failed to recover £1.4bn in disputed dividend tax refunds
back-to-top-scroll